An examination of the components that increase acceptance of smartphones among healthcare professionals

Electronic Journal of Health Informatics

Volumn 5, Issue 2, 2010, Pages

  Chen, Jengchung ^a   Park, Yangil ^b   Putzer, Gavin J ^c,d  

^a NATIONAL CHENG KUNG UNIVERSITY   (Taiwan)

^b GEORGIA SOUTHWESTERN STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c Virginia Peninsula   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA   (United States)

Author keywords

Health information technology; Healthcare professionals; IDT; Mobile technology; Self efficacy; Smartphones; TAM

Indexed keywords

EID: 79955392769     PISSN: 14464381     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. Garrity C, Emam KE. Who's using PDAs? Estimates of PDA use by health care providers: a systematic review of surveys. Journal of Medical Internet Research. 2006; 8(2): e7.
2. Kuziemsky CE, Laul F, Leung RC. A review on diffusion of personal digital assistants in healthcare. Journal of Medical Systems. 2005; 29(4): 335-342.
3. Lu J, Yu C, Liu C. Facilitating conditions, wireless trust and adoption intention. Journal of Computer Information Systems. Fall 2005; 17-24.
4. Putzer GJ, Park Y. The effects of innovation factors on smartphone adoption among nurses in community hospitals. Perspectives in Health Information Management. Winter 2010. Available from: http://perspectives.ahima.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=167:theeffects-of-innovation-factors-on-smartphone-adoption-bynurses-in-community-hospitals-&catid=48:information-technology&Itemid=92
5. Terry K. Doctors are getting more tech savvy. Medical Economics. 2007; 84(15): 52-56.
6. Fishbein M, Ajzen I. Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: an introduction to theory and research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley; 1975.
7. Rogers EM. Diffusion of innovations, 4th edition. New York: The Free Press; 1995.
8. Davis FD. Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly. 1989; 13(3): 319-340.
9. Davis FD. A technology acceptance model for empirically testing new end-user information systems: theory and results (dissertation). Cambridge, (MA): Massachusetts Institute of Technology; 1986.
10. Davis FD, Bagozzi RP, Warshaw PR. User acceptance of computer technology: a comparison of two theoretical models. Management Science. 1989; 35: 982-1003.
11. Mathieson K. Predicting user intentions: comparing the technology acceptance model with the theory of planned behavior. Information System Research. 1991; 2(3): 173-191.
12. Taylor S, Todd P. Understanding information technology usage: A test of competing models. Information System Research. 1995; 6(2): 144-176.
13. Szajna B. Empirical evaluation of the revised technology acceptance model. Management Science. 1996; 42(1): 85-92.
14. Chau PYK. An empirical assessment of a modified technology acceptance model. Journal of Management Information Systems. 1996; 13(2): 185-204.
15. Igbaria M, Zinatelli N, Cragg P, Cavage ALM. Personal computing acceptance factors in small firms: A structural equation model. MIS Quarterly. 1997; 21(3): 279-305.
16. Ma Q, Liu L. The role of Internet self-efficacy in the acceptance of web-based electronic medical records. Journal of Organizational and End User Computing. 2005; 17(1): 38-57.
17. Ma Q, Liu L. The technology acceptance model: a meta-analysis of empirical findings, Journal of Organizational and End User Computing. 2004; 17(1): 59-72.
18. Hu PJ, Chau OR, Sheng ORL, Tam KY. Examining the technology acceptance model using physician acceptance of telemedicine technology. Journal of Management Information Systems. 1999; 16(2): 91-112.
19. Chau P, Hu PJ. Information technology acceptance by individual professionals: a model comparison approach. Decision Sciences. Fall 2001; 32(4): 699-720.
20. Chircu AM, Davis GB, Kauffman RJ. The role of trust and expertise in the adoption of electronic commerce intermediaries (Tech. Rep. No. WP 00-07). Minneapolis (MN): University of Minnesota, Carlson School of Management; 2000.
21. Gefen D, Straub D. Gender differences in the perception and use of e-mail: an extension to the technology acceptance model. MIS Quarterly. 1997; 21(4): 389-401.
22. Straub DW. The effect of culture on IT diffusion: e-mail and fax in Japan and the US. Information System Research. 1994; 5(1): 23-47.
23. Compeau D, Higgins CA. Computer self-efficacy: development of a measure and initial test. MIS Quarterly. June 1995: 189-211.
24. Agrawal R, Sambamurthy V, Stair R. The evolving relationship between general and specific computer literacy: An empirical assessment. Information System Research. 2000; 11(4): 418-430.
25. Venkatesh V, Davis FD. A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies. Management Science. 2000; 46(2): 186-205.
26. Venkatesh V, Davis FD. A model of the antecedents of perceived ease of use: development and test. Decision Sciences. 1996; 27(3): 451-480.
27. So W, Wong D, Scull D. Factors affecting intentions to purchase via the internet. Industrial Management and Data Systems. 2005; 105(9): 1225-1245.
28. Karahanna E, Straub DW, Chervany NL. Information technology adoption across time: a cross-sectional comparison of pre-adoption and post-adoption beliefs. MIS Quarterly. 1999; 23 (2): 183-213.
29. Rogers EM. Diffusion of innovation, 3rd ed. New York: The Free Press; 1983.
30. Kwon TH, Zmud RW. Unifying the fragmented models of information systems implementation. In: Boland RJ, Hirschheim RA, editors. Critical issues in information systems research. New York: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.; 1987.
31. Moore GC, Benbasat I. Development of an instrument to measure the perceptions of adopting an information technology innovation. Information Systems Research. 1991; 2(3): 173-191.
32. Wu IL, Wu KW. A hybrid technology acceptance approach for exploring e-CRM adoption in organizations. Behaviour and Information Technology. 2005; 24(4): 303-316.
33. Hartline MD, Ferrell OC. The management of customer-contact service employees: An empirical investigation. Journal of Marketing. 1996; 60: 52-70.
34. Hair JF, Jr., Anderson RE, Tatham RL, Black WC. Multivariate data analysis, 5th ed. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall Inc; 1998.
35. Sujan H, Weitz BA, Kumar N. Learning orientation, working smart, and effective selling. Journal of Marketing. 1994: 39-52.
36. Garbarino E, Johnson MS. The different roles of satisfaction, trust, and commitment in customer relationship. Journal of Marketing, 1999; 63: 70-87.
37. Howell RD. Covariance structure modeling and measurement issues: A note on interrelations among a channel entity's power sources. Journal of Marketing Research. February 24, 1987: 119-126.